
















































































Class_ \\ X \ 

Book_ Jli (o.— 

Copyright N°__ 


COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 






























































































































































































































































































































i 


























































































• 


' 























































AN ADDRESS 

DELIVERED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY CLUB 
OF WASHINGTON, D. C. 


A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE 
CONSTITUTIONS 

OF 

JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES 


By MASUJI MIYAKAWA 


JANUARY 9, 1909 







iUSEAfiY Of "GtfNGRt.53 

Two Copies Received 

JAN 22 1009 

Cepyrifcfit tntry 
CLASS XXc. No. 

jiiM J mm 


COPY 





/ 


A Comparison Between the Constitutions 
of Japan and the United States 1 


Mr, Chairman, Members of the University Club, and Guests: 

I feel highly honored to be called upon to address you here 
this evening. This assembly, although composed of judges, 
legislators, and those prominent in public and private life, 
seems not technically to be a seminary of jurisprudence. I will, 
therefore, refrain from imposing upon you a purely legal dis¬ 
cussion. But the subject assigned to me is such that I must 
ask your permission, to a certain extent, to dwell upon the legal 
phases of it. 

Fifty years have passed since the American people succeeded 
in opening Japan, which until then had remained forever 
isolated from mutual intercourse with the western nations. 
Taking into consideration the fact that the American people 
alone were successful, while all the leading nations of Europe 
had failed after repeated attempts, the verdict of mankind can 
not but be that God’s hand was in it all. His plans were work¬ 
ing out their glorious, splendid and holy purposes. Wonder¬ 
fully has God guided the American people! Yonder on the 
shore of Kurihama, the Star-Spangled Banner first floated, 
signifying the tremendous destiny of the American people in 
the movement of civilizing the fatherland which was once con¬ 
sidered to be the cradle of the human family, a destiny from 
which the American bugle shall never sound retreat. Romantic 
indeed have been the achievements of the American people in 
writing Japan’s modern history. There are many things to be 
done in America. There are warships to be launched, canals to 
be dug, railways to be laid, natural resources to be preserved, 
tariffs to be adjusted, cities to be built and rebuilt, and foreign 
markets to be won. But there are other things which are far 
more vital and far-reaching, one of which is for the American 
people to help Japan, and with her and through her, save for 
true liberty and civilization as many as half of the human souls 
of the entire globe, crowded together in Asia’s continent. Ever 
since the day of the Pilgrim Fathers, who landed on the Red- 

iAn address by Masuji Miyakawa, delivered before the University 
Club of Washington, D. C., January 9, 1909 - 
Copyright, January 1909, by Masuji Miyakawa. 






men’s soil, it has been yours to set the world the American 

example of right, honor, and justice, which in turn has itself 

served as a motive force for your own progress and civilization. 
Already your patient, generous, and humanitarian efforts have 
saved, changed and blessed the whole of Japan. Japan, in 
a short interval of time, has jumped in one bound from a most 
humiliating national position to one in which the society of 

nations has come to receive her as one of the leaders of the 

civilized world—a change so marvelous that it now occupies 
the center of the world’s attention. When the whole world is 
thus centering its attention on the Japanese civilization, which 
is but the harvest reaped by the American people, it is but 
natural for you, like a good father to his son just from his 
commencement exercises, to ask Japan questions to bring out 
what she has learned at the University of Civilization: How is 
the Japanese civilization ? Is Japan fitted to occupy the position 
of one of the leaders of modern civilization? Have the Japa¬ 
nese a written constitution ? Is the governmental power divided ? 
If so, what are the fundamental principles of this division? 
Are the rights of the Japanese constitutionally protected and 
their wrongs constitutionally remedied? Will Japan in the 
future be a Republic instead of an Empire? Does Japan still 
attribute her civilization to such an imaginary reason as “the 
virtue of the Emperor” against the individual participation and 
success of the rank and file of fifty million people on their 
battlefields and in their workshops ? 

It is to questions like these I shall undertake to give a reply. 
And in investigating with you I hope I may be able in some 
degree to repay the great honor which you have conferred by 
calling upon me to address you. 

In an investigation of the Japanese Constitution of 1889, the 
Executive Department of the Emperor properly comes first, 
just as in a study of the Federal Constitution of the United 
States the States necessarily come first. The Executive De¬ 
partment of the Emperor comes first, because prior tojhe pro¬ 
mulgation of the Constitution the laws issued by the Emperor 
had absolute authority in the regulation of all social and legal 
relationships. And in America the States come first, because 
they are the constituent members of the American Union, their 
laws constituting the original sources of justice and legal rights, 
and because they stand nearest to the people in the regulation 



3 


of all social and legal relationships. So that we will find, just 
as the American people find that the American Constitution 
begins as it ends, with the States rights, that the Japanese / 
governmental power begins as it ends, with the scope and ex¬ 
tent of the powers of the Emperor. 

Although the Japanese Constitution was formulated under 
the influence of those of Europe and America, especially of 
Germany, the Japanese experience during the last twenty years 
has been different from any of them. Japan differs from that 
portion of natural law as defined and taught by Thibaut and 
his disciples. 1 She differs also from that portion of jurispru¬ 
dence which determines to a narrow limit that laws are but the 
production of the national spirit, as taught by Savigny, Pughta, 
and their disciples. 2 When the laws of the advanced nations of 
the West were being introduced into Japan, between the time 
of Perry’s treaty and the promulgation of the Constitution, it 
was a time when the Japanese did not have a definite idea of the 
science of self-government. They were used to the mandate of 
a Superior power. The Japanese learned of such a thing as 
self-government only after laws were introduced to them from 
the West. Japan is not free to claim that her laws were pro¬ 
duced by the strict principles of one and the same continuous 
natural law. Neither is she free to claim that her law is the 
production of her national spirit. The Japanese recognize cer¬ 
tain salutary references in these German authorities, but it can 
not be said that their laws and Constitution were entirely Ger¬ 
manized. If any thing, the English doctrine as pronounced by 
Austin and later pointed out by Dicey, that sovereignty as a 
legal fact is vested in the Emperor, but as a political fact it is in 
the electrates of the country, is the doctrine which may be a near 
approach to the position of Japan .3 The aim of all government, 

thibaut: Ueber die Nothwendigkeit eines allgemeinen burgerlichen 
Gesetzbuches fuer Deutschland. 

Jhering: “Die Emanationstheorie ist das Faulkissen der Wissen- 
schaft;” Entwickelungsgeschichte des roemischen Rechts. S. 13. 

2 Puchta : “Die Ueberzengung dass ein Satz Recht seiDas Gewohn- 
heitsrecht. 

Savigny: Vom Beruf unserer Zeit fuer Gesetzgebung und Recht- 
swissenschaft; System des heutigen roemischen Rechts. 

3Dicey: “The will of the electors shall by regular and constitutional 
means always in the end assert itself as the predominant influence in the 
country. But this is a political fact, not a legal fact. The courts will 
take no notice of the will of the electors. The judges know nothing 
about any will of the people except in so far as that will is expressed by 
an Act of Parliament.” Compare Austin’s Jurisprudence, I, 4th edition, 
p. 268. 



4 


be it Republic or Constitutional Monarchy like Japan, is to 
maintain order, peace, security, and the prosperity of the gov¬ 
erned. For this purpose we have come to recognize a certain 
power of governmental authority, as well as its responsibility 
and dignity. But this recognition is not necessarily limited by 
or dependent upon the particular form or system of govern¬ 
ment. It rather depends upon the character, integrity, and 
veracity of the trustees upon whom the governmental func¬ 
tions are imposed. There may be, therefore, a rotten and dis¬ 
respectful Republic, just as there may be a despot who is as 
hateful as his belief that his rights are special from those of the 
people of his own country. 

Right here, let me reply to a question: Does Japan, as a 
constitutional government still credit all her progress, in war 
and in peace, to the “virtue of the Emperor,” who has never 
been present either on the battlefields or in the work-shops? 
And with all her national advancement does Japan say that 
her law alone is left behind by maintaining the theory that 
“the King can do no wrong,” as if the nation were still in a 
primitive state? In answering the question, I ask you to 
remember with me the unwritten Constitution of Japan, the 
spirit of which is illustrated by one of the Five Articles of the 
Imperial Edict which was promulgated when the present Em¬ 
peror ascended the throne, about fourteen years after the 
Americans succeeded in opening Japan. This never-to-be-for¬ 
gotten Edict of the Emperor says: “The Japenese people must 
adopt what is the best from every nation of the world, entering 
into an honorable rivalry in culture and civilization with all the 
nations of the world.” In realization of this principle, the 
result is that the Empire has been successful in all her under¬ 
takings and has come up to her present eminence. The law 
issued by the Emperor proved to be in the history of modern 
Japan the great and paramount cause and the secret of all the 
blessings of Japanese civilization. I again ask you to open the 
history of any European nation whose starting point is as old 
as Japan’s; you will find that the European King or Emperor 
has been, from time to time, murdered, and the pages of its 
history tainted with the shedding of blood. Even the Presidents 
of the greatest Republic the world has ever begotten have three 
times been made the victims of cold-blooded assassination. 
Then look over the pages of Japanese history and you will find 


5 


nothing of the kind. Does not this fact inculcate a great 
moral lesson, and inspire the Japanese with a faith in their / 
national growth and autonomy? The Emperor’s virtue has 
from time immemorial preserved the nation and a home for the 
people. Just like you have faith in your flag, the Japanese 
have faith in their Emperor. The Japanese generals, admirals, 
and statesmen, who have achieved great things in the interest 
of their nation as well as of the world, ascribe their achieve- ^ 
ments to the virtue of the Emperor. The Japanese soldiers, 
bluejackets, even coolies, will go into the very jaws of death 
singing of the “prosperity of the Emperor,” and if there is a 
breath left before dying, the last words they utter are, “Tenno 
Heika Banzai,” or “Long live the Emperor.” In the Anglo- 
Saxon jurisprudence the Magna Charta was but an instrument 
extorted from unwilling King John, and the Great Charter of 
American Liberty was but an indirect outcome resulting from 
the revolution against King George III. The usefulness or 
uselessness of these Charters depend upon the Englishmen and 
Americans who created them. But with the Japanese, their 
Charter of Liberty was a free and voluntary gift of their 
Emperor to a most grateful people. With the American, it is 
the people, but with the Japanese it is the Emperor who insures 
tranquility, provides for the common defense, promotes the 
general welfare and secures the blessings of liberty to posterity. 
Therefore, you have nothing to wonder at, but will appreciate 
the constitutional provision that the Emperor makes the laws. 

It was quite natural for the Japanese people to have, and for 
the American people not to have, such provisions as these— 
each according to the national circumstances. The Emperor is 
the center of the Japanese interest and individuality, wielding 
a predominating influence over the life and vitality of the 
nation. You who are versed in the study of comparative poli¬ 
tics undoubtedly remember that the special trait of Western 
peoples is objectiveness in making laws, Oriental peoples being 
subjective in that respect,—therefore, you credit law-making 
to your race and religion to the Oriental. But I ask, in the 
American Constitutional Convention, the outcome of a revolu¬ 
tion to get rid of a one-man-executive-head, and which pro¬ 
mulgated your Constitution, was not he who was first in war, 
first in peace, and first in the hearts of his country-men, the 
predominating consideration in your fathers’ consent to elect a 


6 


one-man-executive-head? Is not George Washington’s Ad¬ 
dress that the Americans should not intermeddle with European 
affairs, an unwritten constitution which yet controls your coun¬ 
try, and which you fear to defy openly by making a treaty of 
alliance with any European power? So that the Emperor, no 
less than George Washington, as the Fathers of Japan and 
of America, stand beyond our derogatory comment. The 
Japanese people, as a nation, and as individuals, side by side 
with the Emperor, with a singleness of purpose, adopting what 
is best from the nations of the world, keep pace with the inces¬ 
sant current of modern progress. 

So that the Japanese uphold the principle that the one-man- 
executive-head is a necessary institution. This has been proved 
by the Germans with their Emperor, the English with their 
King, and the Americans with their President. All, according 
to their respective rules of ascension to the position, have a 
one-man-executive-head. But we maintain, and the world 
maintains, that the legal and technical restrictions have yielded 
and will yield, to some extent, to that growing social necessity 
thrust upon a given time and given society by economic change, 
and by the ceaseless progression of mankind the world over. 
The Japanese can not be excepted from this rule of evolution 
whether they like it or not. Even though the Japanese char¬ 
acteristics are those of the oriental races, subjective, submissive, 
obedient, and therefore, happy and contented, they can not 
continue to struggle against the mighty tide of modern prog¬ 
ress. They may be unhappy because cultivated but poor. They 
may feel pained because of the fact that the cultivated mind is 
susceptive of evil. The daughters of the country farmer may 
be unhappy when music, literature, and science, which they 
learn in their normal school, is followed by the uneducated 
beaus, and by hard rural environments and poverty while un¬ 
rest and aspiration for society are eating out their souls. The 
elder businessmen may feel dissatisfied and uncomfortable 
owing to the fact that they can not continue to sit and drink 
tea during their business transactions while they are surrounded 
by American and European buildings and stores of the modern 
style. The Japanese people may be disgusted that they can not 
keep bowing to their knees three or four times in salutation 
when they meet friends in the street while the electric cars are 
running raripant and frequent automobiles speeding before 


7 


them. Although they are charmed and delighted with their 
wives and daughters with their dainty kimonos, lifting the 
front of their dress instead of the rear, they can not help but 
see great changes when they have to hold on to the straps in the 
electric cars. Whether they think it ugly or not, whether 
modest or immodest, they can not help their wives and daugh¬ 
ters from practicing the waltz and from dancing with their 
American and European guests. Whether they adore the 
Emperor with hereditary veneration or hold fast to the theory 
that “the King can do no wrong,” they find that the English 
King or the American President directly address him by his 
personal name, and that the Emperor responds in the same 
way. All these and other innumerable causes both within and 
without Japan, are slowly but surely affecting the very life of 
Japan itself.* 

However, we must keep in mind that the essential elements 
of good government are permanence and stability. They are to 
a government what credit is to a commercial house. In any 
well regulated government there must be no doubt at any 
moment where the sovereignty resides. An instant of doubt 
may cause anarchy. However strong a government may be 
apparently, it is comparatively weak until this point is settled. 
If, instead of one ascertained and clearly defined claimant to 
the seat of power, there are two or more with their followings, 
the result is civil war. The principle of heredity in the King- 
ship is better than civil war. There must be some central power 
strong enough to rule all. But we must also take in considera¬ 
tion that political history proves that even under the most 

4 Recently certain lecturers have been introducing Japan in their lec¬ 
tures with illustrations. Some of them, like a photograph gallery, may 
be interesting, but many of them are worse than nothing. The latter 
consume almost two-thirds of their time with illustrations of the 
Japanese Kimonos, Rikisha-men, Geisha girls, and other things, this 
being done under the mask of education, and on the Sabbath day at 
that. If the Japanese were to lecture in Japan upon American civiliza¬ 
tion, giving two-thirds of their attention to Coolies working on cotton 
plantations, American Rikisha-men pushing chairs at Palm Beach, 
Florida; immoral girls in opium dens, saloons and red-light districts, 
and regreting that the Americans did not keep their once stylish bonnet 
with ribbons and hoop skirt with bustles, instead of the now four-inch 
stock collars and merry-widow hats, and the now habit of chewing 
gum in street cars, would such trash lectures be educational any more 
than the Japanese lecture in America? Do such lectures make the 
world better, friendlier, closer and more amalgamated in the optimistic 
march of human civilization? Never! After a few months in a foreign 
country, a lecturer with motion pictures is like a baby with a sharp 
sword—very, very dangerous. 



8 


complete system of despotism the most dignified rights were 
given to the Roman citizenship, as brought out under Diocletian 
and Constantine, and yet at this time Romans fled across the 
Danube and the Rhine and were satisfied to cast their lot 
among the barbarians. Rome lost her national life mainly 
because its government was not founded on the principle 
of individualism, representation, and concentration. This 
principle stimulates personal and individual liberty, and has 
been the common heritage of the Anglo-Saxon race, having 
been cherished by the ancient Teutons. The Latin and Japa¬ 
nese races, however, inherited a peculiar system of government; 
to their minds the state is everything and the individual com¬ 
paratively nothing.? 

It is asked by many Americans: Will Japan in the future 
be a Republic instead of an Empire? It is difficult for me to 
predict what form of government might in the future be 
adopted by Japan. But it may be safely asserted that the 
people of Japan will make more and more intellectual and con¬ 
stitutional progress, and will assert their power more and more 
in and through the House of Representatives, but this will not 
necessarily revolutionize their form of government. The Japa¬ 
nese people in their Parliament may become as powerful and 
omnipotent as the Englishmen are in their Parliament, and 
thereby may make any and every law and even appoint or dis¬ 
miss the Imperial Cabinet; but the Imperial throne will be per¬ 
petuated generation after generation as a necessary institution. 

Leaving politics and coming to the Constitution, we find that 
in Japan, or any other government, the constitution is the 
organic law in that both rules of law and of politics spring from 
it. The Englishmen who lecture on the English Constitution 
dwell principally upon it as the source of politics. Germans, 
when studying their Constitution, consider it as the source of 
law. The French, when studying their Constitution, consider 
it as the source of both politics and law. The Americans at¬ 
tempt to draw a line between them, while the Japanese endeavor 
to adjust the two. If it be said that war is fought for peace 
and that peace is a mere truce during war, the constitution might 
be said to be established in the name of peace, though it might 
lay down rules of war for the final purpose of human govern- 

sRead Miyakawa’s “Powers of the American People,” 2d edition, 
p. 2-10. 



9 


ment, which is justice. The Japanese people have had their 
Constitution over twenty years, during which time they have 
fought under the provisions of the Constitution for the estab¬ 
lishment of justice, and the war is still going on. But the 
Japanese condition is not at all strange to you. You, too, have 
fought battles under your Constitution. The distrust of, or 
confidence in, the American government in “the better days of 
the Republic,” depend much upon whether Hamilton or Jef¬ 
ferson ruled. If you would refresh your distrust of the great¬ 
ness of all government of law, study Jefferson through Burr 
and Hamilton, or Washington and Hamilton through Jefferson, 
or Jackson through Clay and the second Adams, or Clay and 
Adams through Jackson and Randolph. The differences at 
Sumpter and Appomatox were adjusted by the arbitrament of 
the sword. Yet, fresher and more recent wars are going on. 
Is it true that the State rights side is merely fighting from the 
selfish interests of demagogues who seek political power by 
attacking the nation-wide-authority? Is it true that the Ameri¬ 
can Constitution exists for the people, so that its constructions 
are to be changed according to changing conditions? Is it 
true that the march of nationality is not to be withstood, that 
the salvation of the constitution is in its capacity for self¬ 
enlargement, determined by the enlarging necessities of the 
people? Is he a public enemy who does not recognize the 
capacity of the constitution for growth? Or, is there develop¬ 
ing in America a tendency to increase the power of the Federal 
government at the expense of the State government, and is 
there in the Federal government a tendency to enhance the 
power of the Executive Department at the expense of the 
Judicial and Legislative Departments? Is it true that the 
great American question was once whether the States would 
destroy the National government, while now the great question 
seems to be whether the National government shall be permitted 
to destroy the States ? Is the theory to hold good in America 
today that to centralize is the act and trick of despots, and to 
decentralize is the necessary wisdom of those who love good 
government? You may array yourselves upon whichever side 
you please in America, but neither side can deny the fact that 
there are ceaseless wars being fought under the constitutional 
rules of war, and in no less degree than in Japan. 


10 


But let us not forget the meaning of the fact that all the 
wars the American people have fought under their Constitu¬ 
tion were for the tranquility, the safety, and the inspiration of a 
government of liberty and law. The American Republic stands 
alone in the whole world as the only Republic being capable 
of, and faithful to, representative institutions, with equal rights, 
equal justice and equal laws for every condition of men. In 
every period of your great conflicts under the constitution your 
fighters have been the ablest men the world has ever furnished. 
Rome and Greece in the zenith of their greatness never gathered 
such a galaxy of statesmen. It is true that Rome was called a 
Republic, but her record of all the thousand years of Roman 
greatness is the record of marvelous ambition and conquest. 
The proudest era Rome ever knew was but the sign of her 
eternal destruction. Carthage was also called a Republic. Her 
great chieftain swept over the Pyrenees and the Alps, and even 
made the gates of the Eternal City tremble. But the God of 
nations had “stretched out upon it the line of confusion and the 
stones of emptiness.” We read of the Grecian Republic; but 
if any one would compare it to that of America it would be a 
criminal libel upon free government. Athenian history is 
most thrilling and instructive, but the citizens of Athens were 
strangers to freedom. Yours is, unlike all other Republics, 
guided supremely by intelligent and educated public conviction, 
and those who are clothed with authority are, and ever have 
been, the forerunners of highest Christian civilization and the 
exponents of the popular will. Herein lies the source of the 
immortality and progression of free government. The whole 
accessible world has benefited by coming in contact with your 
Republic. The Japanese people, by their geographical prox¬ 
imity and characteristic receptiveness have benefited more than 
any other nation on the earth. You have convulsed Japanese 
institutions from center to circumference. Now, America and 
Japan are on the path of matchless progress, and are co¬ 
workers in the great cause of perfecting new humanity and new 
civilization. Japan, as I have said, under her constitution is 
waging war as the American people do in their country, both 
aiming at the same end of their respective governments—the 
establishment of true justice to all men. War under the Japa¬ 
nese Constitution has during the last twenty years been a 
peaceful and thorough-going war of the people for development 


II 


of the power of Parliament, or what the Japanese call the 
Imperial Diet, to counterbalance the omnipotence of the Execu¬ 
tive Department. 

It is said by some one that the Emperor in promulgating 
the Constitution entered into a contract with the people, and 
that the Emperor and the people thenceforward had equal 
rights in making the laws. I think this is a gross misconception 
of the nature of the sovereignty of Japan. The sovereignty of 
any nation, Republic or Constitutional Monarchy, must be a 
unit and must spring from one and the same source. Here in 
America sovereignty is in the people, there in Japan in the 
Emperor—whatever name you give it, it is just like the domi- 
nent will in the human body. To carry out the bodily functions 
it calls on the distinct bodily organs to perform their distinct 
functions. And those distinct organs of the sovereignty of a 
nation are composed of the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial 
Departments of the government. Each of these organs carry 
out distinct functions. So you see that this idea that the con¬ 
stitution is a contract between the Emperor and the people is all 
wrong. There are some who say that on account of the original 
policy of the Japanese government the Imperial Diet can make 
the laws just so much as expressly authorized to it by the Con¬ 
stitution, the rest remaining with the Emperor. Do they mean 
to say that the Emperor under the Constitution can make any 
and every law which is not authorized to the Imperial Diet? 
I do not think that is it. If so, it is another misconception. 
Does not the Constitution divide the governmental power 
strictly among the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial De¬ 
partments? Do not the Belgian and German Constitutions, 
from which Japan took this pattern, strictly divide the govern¬ 
mental power into these three departments? Should such a 
misconception be recognized so that the Legislative is limited to 
make law regarding only those matters that are expressly given 
to it, then the so-called division of the governmental power is 
sheer mockery. If, as some one says, the constitution is a con¬ 
tract under which the Emperor and the people equally make the 
laws, or if, as another says, the Imperial Diet can make laws 
only so far as it is expressly empowered, then why in the name 
of common sense did they put in Article XXXVIII, which 
says: “Every law requires the consent of the Imperial Diet.” 
Why did they provide such an unnecessary Article in the Con- 


t 


12 


stitution; and in dividing the power of the government why 
did they establish the Legislative Department. In this Article 
you find no “if,” no “but.” The Imperial Diet is the sole and 
absolute organ of making the laws, this in spite of the most con¬ 
servative school of statesmen, who uphold the omnipotence of 
the Emperor and insist that there are legal and technical objec¬ 
tions to any other theory. The so-called legal and technical 
objections at the most are that if the Diet has powers otherwise 
than the fifteen powers given to it in express terms, then the 
very claims of the Legislative Department make its own ad¬ 
mitted powers unnecessary and useless. These objections are 
the last point they can make against the Diet. But what are the 
so-called fifteen powers of the Diet ? 6 Are they such enumerated 
powers as are the sixteen powers of the Congress under the 
Constitution of the United States? A judicious student of con¬ 
stitutional law should soon find that these fifteen powers of the 
Imperial Diet when compared with the sixteen powers of the 
American Congress are as different and far apart as that wide 
difference between the sixteen powers of the American Con¬ 
gress under the Constitution and the Declaration of Inde¬ 
pendence and the Declaration of Rights. If, for instance, you 
look into the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration 
of Rights, you will be able to identify every one of the so-called 
fifteen powers of the Imperial Diet with those in these Declara¬ 
tions which fundamentally guarantee the rights of man. There¬ 
fore, the Diet when claiming powers otherwise than the so- 


6 i. Laws relating to the condition and effects of a state of siege 
(Art. IX.) 

2. Laws relating to the special courts or military tribunals. (Art. LX.) 

3. Laws relating to the courts of administration litigation. (Art. LXI.) 

4. Laws relating to the Board of Audit. (Art. LXXII.) 

5. Laws relating to the organization of the courts of law. (Arts. 
LVII, LVIII.) 

6. Laws relating to the Imperial Diet. (Art. LI, XXXV.) 

7. Laws relating to the conditions necessary for being a Japanese 
subject. (Art. XVIII). 

8. Laws relating to service in the Army and Navy. (Art. XX.) 

9. Laws relating to the paying of taxes. (Art. XXXI, LXII.) 

10. Laws relating to residence and travel. (Art. XXII). 

11. Laws relating to arrest, trial, and punishment. (Art. XXIII). 

12. Laws relating to searches of private houses. (Art. XXV). 

13. Laws relating to the rights of property. (Art. XXVII.) 

14. Laws relating to the inviolability of letters. (Art. XXVI.) 

15. Laws relating to the liberty of press, speech, gathering, and 
religion. (Art. XXIX.) 

For full text of the Japanese Constitution see Appendix of Miyakawa’s 
" Powers of the American People, ’ 2nd. Ed. 



13 


called fifteen powers can not be said in the least to have for¬ 
feited its powers. Neither can it be said that the Declaration 
of Rights of the Japanese people contains unnecessary and use¬ 
less provisions. 

The Imperial Diet has in practice not only power over the 
rights implied in the so-called fifteen powers, but also has all 
other powers, written and unwritten, over commercial, civil, 
or criminal law, and laws relating to the municipal or local gov¬ 
ernments. After twenty years of experience and practice, the 
three fundamental divisions of government have become so 
deeply rooted that the people of Japan understand and let all 
the world understand that the Imperial Diet is one of the three 
potentially co-ordinate branches of the government. Standing 
upon the Constitutional nomenclature, the Diet can not delegate 
an iota of power to any other body. It is a distinct organ carry¬ 
ing out its distinct functions for the continuation of the Japa¬ 
nese government under the reign of law. 

The reign of law is the goal of human progress in Japan or 
America, and progress is the law of modern civilization. Let 
us hope for the sake and glory of Japan that despite her tra¬ 
ditional conservatism, which drives men to cling with venera¬ 
tion to what is old, from its people will come great jurists, who 
will redeem the Japanese Constitution from the reproach of 
formalism and release it from the shackles of red-tape. May 
those trained in the Japanese Constitution be as nobly learned 
as those of America, ever inspired by each other’s lofty ideas of 
law; may the people of Japan and the United States not only 
be able to harmonize their Constitutions, but also be able to 
establish a higher law than their Constitutions, which shall 
regulate their authority over their domains, and which shall be 
a part of the common heritage of mankind, bestowed upon 
them by the Creator of the Universe. May Japan and the 
United States, in the future, therefore, be the Kingdom of God 
on earth. 


POWERS 

OF THE 

AMERICAN PEOPLE 

(SECOND EDITION) 

By MASUJI MIYAKAWA, D. C. L., LL. D. 

Japanese Member of the American Bar, Editor of Comparative Law 
Bureau of the American Bar Association, Author of 
“ Life of Japan,” Etc. 


This important work is an examination into the powers of 
the American citizen, Congress, President, and Courts, accord¬ 
ing to the evolution of the Constitution. “Our country-men 
read Dr. Miyakawa’s Towers of the American People/ ” writes 
Count Okuma, ex-Premier of Japan, “with the same approval 
as the English did James Bryce’s ‘The American Common¬ 
wealth.’ ” The Speaker of the Imperial House of Representa¬ 
tives, Hon. Teiichi Sugita, commends the book in cordial terms 
to students of political subjects, and characterizes the book as 
“great.” “The book is admirably presented,” writes Secretary 
Straus, and United States Senator Lodge characterizes it as 
“exceedingly interesting.” “Great industry is manifested,” 
writes Chief Justice Clabaugh of the Supreme Court of the 
District of Columbia. “It can not fail to be of substantial 
benefit to this people to see how their system is regarded by a 
well-informed Japanese scholar,” says Chief Justice Baldwin of 
the Supreme Court of Connecticut. He further says that the 
author has “brought out into strong relief some things which 
are but half appreciated by Americans themselves.” “I have 
been looking through it, and find it very valuable,” writes Gov¬ 
ernor Gillett of California. “I am glad to have the point of 
view which it has brought forth,” adds United States Commis¬ 
sioner of Education Elmer E. Brown. Governor Chamberlain 
of Oregon characterizes the book as “a most valuable addition 
to the history of this country.” “I desire to express my appre¬ 
ciation,” writes Governor Hughes of New York, “of intelligent 
efforts to extend the knowledge of our system of government.” 


The present second edition is printed from new plates with extensive additions. 
Size, 6 % x 6 %. Pp. xiv, 431. Price, $2.50 net. 


THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY, Publishers 
33 East 17th Street, New York 






















































































































































































































































































































































































































. 



















































































































. 

% 

































































































































































































































































































































































































. 







































































































































. 









